Treaty of Versailles
Debate Rounds (5)
Thesis: The Treaty of Versailles was fair and reasonable
To start the Treaty of Versailles of 1919 , imposed by the Supreme Court was in fair to Germany. The Germans were involved in the war, and lost fair and square. Now , Woodrow Wilson practiced moral diplomacy , and to him it was a fair treaty. Now to look back at other situations in history. Throughout history it has been common practice for the victor to impose sanctions on the losers. Have you ever heard the saying "To the victor go the spoils". Alexander the Great, Hannibal, Napoleon, the Vatican, Ferdinand of Spain, and many others have long practiced this belief. The treaty did not erase the German nation and split it up among the victors. It did not diminish its national identity, nor did it enslave the people of Germany.
America Past and Present APUSH Book
I figured you would say that. You avoided addressing all except one of my claims, so I assume that you have no counterargument against them. It was fair because Germany started the war with the Schlieffen Plan. The war caused millions of people to die so because of that they should not have had a say in what the Treaty of Versailles said. The loss of life on both sides was an unpayable debt and the terms of the treaty were fair. Not only was there a great loss of life, but the damage to the European infrastructure was also impacted. The destruction in Europe was extensive and Germany was to was very lenient and he was trying to punish Germany, but not as harshly as the others. Wilson was trying to bring peace in a friendly way. Wilson wasn't seeking revenge.The provision that was fair was the decrease to Germany’s army. If Germany’s army was decreased then they were most likely not going to start any more wars because they simply would not have enough man power to help them succeed. All of the provision had there place and had a purpose to serve.Germany was given harsh requirements but sometimes you need to set those harsh requirements to prove a point. The Treaty of VersaillesGeorges Clemenceau of France had one very simple belief – Germany should be brought to its knees so that she could never start a war again, and this belief was not initiated in the Treaty of Versailles , so Germany should have been grateful for that , considering the French lost 1.4 million soldiers in the war.
APUSH America Past and Present Pearson
You are avoiding every single one of my points, which is in my opinion an automatic forfeit! A debate is supposed to be consistent of rebuttals , and counterclaims, and right now I just see you spewing your own argument , and completely ignoring mine. Also , I already saw your argument coming , because you previously wrote an opinion piece on this , so I knew your entire argument on the subject beforehand.
You provide no evidence for your claims.
and finally the United States of America attacked Germany for attacking Great Britain. All of that could have just been a small border war between Serbia,but because of the alliances it brought all of Europe and the United States into War.
While it is true that alliances between Austria - Hungary , Germany, and other countries did extensively bring WW1 to a large scale war. The US did not attack the Germans, the Germans attacked American merchant ships causing economic damage to the United States, so that statement is false.
The Treaty of Versailles isn't fair. Germany shouldn't take full blame for the war.
Although the murder of Arch Duke Ferdinand was the spark of the war,Germany officially started the war with the Schlieffen Plan. It also delivered the Zimmerman telegram. They caused a lot of damage to other countries, so a harsh punishment is fair. You do the crime you do the time.
3105193 forfeited this round.
Extend. Vote Pro(for).
3105193 forfeited this round.
Extend. The Treaty Versailles was fair. Vote for Pro (for).
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Behold 3 months ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: As Pro said, Con has basically forfeited all points by non-response.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.